The notion that student personnel work was more than the administration of student services, that total full-rounded education and development was a legitimate concern of higher education, is not new but is a theme that has surfaced in publications of 30 or 40 years ago. What was purportedly new about the student development movement of the late 60s and early 70s was that university staff should intentionally introduce proactive programs and that the nature and content of these interventions and the outcome could be specified by designing them in conformance with an appropriate theory of human development. The student development movement grew as explicated in three seminal documents: (1) "Student Development Services in Higher Education" (Council of Student Personnel Associations in Post Secondary Education, 1972); (2) "Student Development in Tomorrow's Higher Education--A Return to the Academy" (Bob Brown, 1972; and (3) "A Student Development Model for Student Affairs in Tomorrow's Higher Education" (American College Personnel Association, 1975). Today there is a professional association that regards human development as the commonly held core of the profession, a journal that has apparently reoriented its focus from the general concerns of the broad student affairs field to concentrate on student development, and a profession that has committed its future to a version of its mission that has not yet proven itself and has failed markedly to accomplish its major goals. (ABL)